VerTiGo said:
I'll never understan the Matt hate. Why should he have to agree and support every move that Nintendo does? He's one of the very few editors at IGN that actually seem to have a unique opinion about things.
When I read the spec articles I get the message "it is baaad....haha...it is even worse than we expected".
When I read the specs I would say they might sound bad when it comes to raw power, but they dont actually say much about what the games will look like.
Hardcore gamers are probably laughing, but I play PC games with a 6600 non GT. I play HL2 at full settings, just not at 1600x1200 4xAA but at 800x600. That needs only a fraction of the fillrate and raw power, but it still looks absolutely great. Games like AOE3 with Shader 3.0 support even look better than on faster shader 2.0 only ATI boards.
Same goes for Rev vs. 360/PS3. Nintendo needs only a third of the fillrate because of using 480p. Games sure wont look as defined as PS3/xbox games but they will look spectacular anyway. Reduce the texture resolution of the games by factor 2 and you'll save factor 4 in memory and a good amount of raw power too.
And whatever the specs are, we will still get the best Zelda, Metroid, Mario, SSBM etc. and you are in for a disappointment if oyu believe they wont look awesome. I'll choose 3 times better looking Chozo Ruins over PDZ anytime. The specs floating around combined in a brilliant architecture used to the fullest with all the shaders avalaible will easily look as good or better than any first gen 360 game...just not as defined.
Third party games will sell if they use the controller. Ports will probably look worst on GC and will only sell to Rev only users, but I am pretty positive that porting them will be easy just by reducing (texture) resolution but leaving geometry and most effects intact.
But Matt just leaves it to the haters and drama queens to decide how inferior the Rev hardware is...and btw. I still dont believe in this to be the final specs.
